Friday, November 18, 2016

The Wall Street Journal Opinion - LettersNov. 18, 2016 2:52 p.m. ETJonathan Riches and Thomas P. Gross’s “Ride-Sharing for Pilots Is No Flight of Fancy” (op-ed, Nov. 16) suggests the Federal Aviation Administration is barring pilots from using the internet to take advantage of the share economy. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is part of a campaign to convince people it is now acceptable to allow the public to ride-share with private pilots with potentially little flight time or training for challenging weather conditions. As the U.S. Court of Appeals noted in one of several legal rebukes issued to the authors’ clients, “Pilots communicating to defined and limited groups remain free to invite passengers for common-purpose expense-sharing flights . . . so long as they share a common purpose and do not hold themselves out as offering services to the public.”Consistent with previous attempts to offer the same service using telephone-based technology, the FAA determined the proposed service cited in the article requires additional safety certifications for both the pilots and their aircraft. It is instructive to look at the legislative language the authors support. It would override the FAA’s safety regulations, something unnecessary if the only issue was internet communication. We doubt the Supreme Court will grant certiorari in this matter because it is neither a novel question of law nor are there any disputes between the lower courts as to the FAA’s interpretation. The National Air Transportation Association will continue to educate lawmakers on how the authors’ clients are simply selling old wine in a new bottle to ultimately undermine the safety of the flying public.Martin H. HillerPresidentNational Air Transportation Assn. WashingtonOriginal article can be found here: http://www.wsj.comRide-Sharing for Pilots Is No Flight of Fancy: Supreme Court decision to review Flytenow v. Federal Aviation Administration could make airplane flight-sharing an option for AmericansThe Wall Street JournalOpinion/CommentaryBy JONATHAN RICHES and THOMAS P. GROSSNovember 15, 2016 6:54 p.m. ETFrom Uber to Airbnb, the “sharing economy” is revolutionizing industries by letting companies connect directly with consumers. If the Supreme Court decides to review Flytenow v. FAA, Americans could benefit from cost-sharing in the airline industry.In late 2014 the Federal Aviation Administration banned private pilots from communicating travel plans and sharing flight expenses over the internet. That order shut down Flytenow, a startup that connected pilots and cost-sharing passengers online.Around the same time, the European Aviation Safety Agency found compelling reasons to allow the very same cost-sharing operations in Europe. On Aug. 26, the agency authorized cost-sharing for general aviation flights in 32 countries. At least two companies similar to Flytenow, called Wingly and Off We Fly, now operate in the European Union.In American aviation, cost-sharing isn’t a new thing. For over 50 years the FAA has allowed pilots and passengers to communicate about cost-sharing via email and phone as well as by posting notices on airport bulletin boards.With seed money from Silicon Valley, Flytenow brought that practice into the digital age. And it was working until the FAA shut down the startup. The agency claimed that if a private pilot flying a four-passenger airplane used Flytenow to communicate travel plans and find people to share his expenses, that pilot should be regulated as a commercial flight operation.Yet the FAA ignored a key difference between commercial and general aviation: Commercial pilots provide services to the public for profit; Flytenow pilots merely share expenses. By regulation, flight-sharing pilots must pay at least a pro rata share of flight expenses, so they can never earn a profit. The FAA’s conclusion also missed that pilots have a First Amendment right to communicate their noncommercial travel plans with others, even over the internet.The FAA’s job is to ensure safety. Yet its rationale for deeming Flytenow dangerous is based on pre-internet policies. Web-based flight-sharing arrangements, where pilots are screened, and their experience and credentials are displayed for potential passengers, are actually safer than simply posting flight times on an airport bulletin board.The Goldwater Institute challenged the FAA’s legal interpretation on behalf of Flytenow and the Supreme Court is expected to decide within the next few weeks whether to review the case. Meanwhile, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has passed an amendment to its FAA reauthorization bill that would authorize web-facilitated flight sharing.The Flytenow case presents an opportunity for the Supreme Court and Congress to say consumers and service providers should be free to choose which innovations work for them. If Europe can ensure the safety of these tech innovations, then so can the U.S.Mr. Riches, director of national litigation at the Goldwater Institute, represents Flytenow before the Supreme Court. Mr. Gross is an attorney and a private pilot.Original article can be found here: http://www.wsj.com

Stephen Magee, husband and pilot of the Cessna 172, suffered serious injuries when the plane crashed into a home in the Moss Beach area on November 18, 2016. Stephen Magee is an original member of the Sac Aero Flying Club and which owned the Cessna 172N Skyhawk.

Location: Moss Beach, CAAccident Number: WPR17FA023Date & Time: 11/18/2016, 1117 PSTRegistration: N6610DAircraft: CESSNA 172NAircraft Damage: SubstantialDefining Event: Turbulence encounterInjuries: 1 Fatal, 1 SeriousFlight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal Analysis The private pilot and a passenger were approaching the airport to land with a 70° right crosswind at 10 knots (kts) with gusts to 14 kts. The pilot reported that, on final approach, the airplane was configured with full flaps (30°) at an airspeed of 60 kts, and an altitude of 500 ft mean sea level (msl) when it began to encounter turbulence. The pilot then elected to conduct the landing approach at a higher airspeed and subsequently retracted the flaps from 30° to less than 20°. Immediately after reconfiguring the flaps, the pilot reported that he experienced strong turbulence that violently rocked the airplane and simultaneously felt a "strong downdraft" as the airplane entered a right bank. The pilot was unable to correct the airplane's attitude, and the airplane subsequently descended into terrain, where it impacted a paved road, several vehicles, and two houses before coming to rest.A weather study revealed that, at the time of the accident, a weak temperature inversion was present between 400 and 600 ft msl. The stable layer of air produced by the temperature inversion trapped any updrafts or downdrafts created by the wind flowing over nearby terrain. This created an environment favorable for the development of low level wind shear and turbulence below 600 ft msl. Although airplane performance data revealed that the pilot maintained an airspeed above the airplane's stall speed throughout the landing approach, his decision to retract the flaps likely resulted in a sudden loss of lift. This loss of lift, combined with the low level wind shear and turbulent conditions, most likely resulted in the pilot's loss of control during the approach for landing. Probable Cause and FindingsThe National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:The pilot's loss of airplane control following an encounter with low level wind shear and turbulence during final approach for landing. Contributing to the loss of control was the pilot's decision to retract the wing flaps on final approach, which resulted in a sudden loss of lift. FindingsAircraftLateral/bank control - Attain/maintain not possible (Cause)Descent rate - Attain/maintain not possible (Cause)TE flap control system - Incorrect use/operation (Factor)Personnel issuesAircraft control - Pilot (Cause)Use of equip/system - Pilot (Factor)Decision making/judgment - Pilot (Factor)Environmental issuesWindshear - Effect on operation (Cause)Terrain induced turbulence - Effect on operation (Cause)Factual InformationHistory of FlightApproach-VFR pattern finalTurbulence encounter (Defining event)Maneuvering-low-alt flyingLoss of control in flightApproachCollision with terr/obj (non-CFIT)On November 18, 2016, about 1117 Pacific standard time, a Cessna 172N, N6610D, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain while on final approach to Half Moon Bay Airport (HAF), Half Moon Bay, California. The private pilot sustained serious injuries, and the passenger was fatally injured. The personal flight was operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed in the area, and no flight plan was filed for the flight, which originated from Sacramento Executive Airport (SAC), Sacramento, California, about 1015, and was destined for HAF.The pilot reported that, before departing SAC, he checked the weather for HAF, which indicated winds were from the southwest. He subsequently departed and requested visual flight rules flight following to HAF. The pilot stated that while approaching HAF, he made position reports on the airport's common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) and requested traffic information. Someone responded that the wind was from the southeast up to 15 knots (kts) and that runway 12 was in use.The pilot stated that he entered the airport traffic pattern for runway 12, and that as the airplane entered the final leg of the traffic pattern, the visual approach slope indicator (VASI) lights indicated that the airplane was high. At that time, the airplane was at an altitude about 800 ft mean sea level (msl) and at an airspeed of 65 kts when he reduced power to intercept the VASI glideslope.As the airplane continued on the final approach path with full flaps (30°) at 60 kts and about 500 ft msl, it began to encounter light turbulence. The pilot was concerned that if the turbulence continued during the approach, he would be vulnerable to strong buffeting at normal approach speed, which might lead to a rough landing; as a countermeasure, he elected to land at a higher airspeed. The pilot then retracted the flaps to less than 20° while applying additional power to stay on the glideslope. The pilot added that, immediately after making these adjustments, he felt strong turbulence violently rock the airplane, which caused the wings to "dip," first to the left, and then to the right. He "simultaneously" felt a strong downdraft, and the airplane entered a steep right bank. The pilot stated that he fought to level the wings and gain altitude by applying full power, slight back pressure on the yoke, and then left aileron and rudder, but nothing seemed to correct the descent and right bank attitude. The pilot stated that he observed runway 12 come into view about 90° to his right but could not reach the runway due to the airplane's low altitude. Shortly thereafter, the pilot noticed large trees coming into view. Wanting to avoid trees in his flight path, the pilot stated that he maneuvered and tried to drag the airplane's tail on the ground. He next recalled closing his eyes to protect them, followed by impact.

Wreckage and Impact InformationCrew Injuries: 1 SeriousAircraft Damage: SubstantialPassenger Injuries: 1 FatalAircraft Fire: NoneGround Injuries: N/AAircraft Explosion: NoneTotal Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 SeriousLatitude, Longitude: 37.520000, -122.511389 The airplane descended into a residential area about 1,822 ft northwest of the HAF runway 12 threshold. The initial point of impact was identified by two parallel rubber tire marks on a street about 245 ft southwest of the main wreckage. The airplane continued in a northeast direction across an open field that was about 100 ft wide, and subsequently struck a wooden fence that separated the field from a home. The airplane then continued on a northeast heading as it impacted the southeast corner of the roof of the home, which was followed by impact with a utility truck. The airplane's right wing tip and a landing gear strut were found in the front yard of the home.The wreckage path then continued about 60 ft in a northeasterly direction. The nose landing gear was located about 30 ft northeast of the utility truck, and the main wreckage came to rest on the southwest corner of a second home. The lower fuselage came to rest flush against the brick structure of the residence with the engine firewall resting upright on the ground. The empennage separated just behind the rear passenger seats and was folded over and on top of the cabin, with the vertical stabilizer and rudder resting on the ground. The horizontal stabilizer and elevator remained attached to the fuselage. The cabin and cockpit areas were both destroyed by impact forces.The left wing remained attached to the fuselage; the wing strut remained attached. The left flap and the inboard half of the aileron remained attached to the left wing.The right wing, which had separated from the fuselage, impacted a white cargo van that was parked in an adjacent driveway about 7 ft from the main wreckage site.About 4 ft of the outboard right aileron was separated from the wing and located next to the fuselage. The inboard section of the right aileron remained attached to the wing. Additionally, the right flap remained attached to the wing and appeared to be in the fully retracted position. The leading edge of the wing sustained impact damage. About 5 ft of the leading edge skin was separated at the wing's mid-span section. The outboard leading edge exhibited a concave depression.The engine, propeller, and one of the landing gear struts were located under the right wing. The left and right main landing gear wheels were separated from the wreckage and found about 42 ft north of the fuselage, next to the backyard fence of the second residence. Additional InformationPerformance StudyAn airplane performance study based on radar data revealed that the airplane approached HAF from the north and entered at 45° to the upwind leg for runway 12. The airplane's speed was about 86 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) and its altitude about 1,000 ft mean sea level (msl) when the pilot completed the turn for a left downwind to runway 12.The airplane slowed to about 80 KIAS and descended to about 700 ft msl on the downwind leg. The airplane then entered a continuous, 180° left turn from the downwind to final legs of the traffic pattern. Radar data indicated that, at 1116:20, the airspeed was about 57 KIAS, the altitude was 500 ft msl (about 440 ft above ground level), and the airplane was at the apex of a 10°-bank left turn to final. At this point, the airplane's pitch angle changed from about 5° nose up to about -3° nose down, and the airplane accelerated as it descended until impact, which occurred about 1117:10.The airplane's Pilot Operating Handbook (POH) estimates that the airplane will stall between 31 kts calibrated airspeed (KCAS) and 40 KCAS, depending on the airplane's flap position and bank angle. Additionally, the POH recommends "a slightly higher approach speed under turbulent air conditions." This is to compensate for any sudden loss in the headwind component, which would result in a momentary loss of airspeed and could lead to an aerodynamic stall above the published stall speed. Although the POH does not define "slightly higher", the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook recommends adding one-half of the reported surface wind gust to the normal final approach airspeed when landing in turbulent conditions.The handbook states that the degree to which flaps should be extended during a crosswind approach and landing vary with the airplane's handling characteristics, as well as the wind velocity. Additionally, the handbook advises that retraction of wing flaps during an approach for landing "suddenly decreases lift and causes the airplane to sink rapidly."

NTSB Identification: WPR17FA02314 CFR Part 91: General AviationAccident occurred Friday, November 18, 2016 in Moss Beach, CAAircraft: CESSNA 172N, registration: N6610DInjuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious.This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.On November 18, 2016, about 1120 Pacific standard time, a Cessna 172N, N6610D, sustained substantial damage after impacting terrain and objects in a residential area near Moss Beach, California, following a loss of control while on final approach to Half Moon Bay Airport (HAF), Half Moon Bay, California. The private pilot sustained serious injuries, and the non-pilot rated passenger was fatally injured. The personal cross-country flight was being operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulation Part 91, and a flight plan was not filed. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which originated from the Sacramento Executive Airport (SAC), Sacramento, California, about 1015, with HAF as the destination.In a telephone conversation with the National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge five days after the accident, the pilot reported that when he was about one-half mile from the end of runway 12 at an altitude of about 500 feet, with flaps full and an airspeed of 60 knots, he encountered light turbulence. He then reduced the flap setting to between 15 to 20 degrees, and increased power. At about this time he encountered very strong turbulence, which caused the wings to rock back and forth, followed by a very sudden downward push, which then resulted in the airplane going into a hard right bank attitude. The pilot stated that he tried to counter the right turn with an increase in power and left control yoke input, but the airplane continued in an uncommanded sweeping right turn. The pilot further stated that the airplane remained in the right turn very low to the ground, would not respond to the left control yoke input to counter the right turn, and would not gain altitude with the throttle pushed fully in. The pilot opined that as he was getting lower and closer to the ground, the airplanes' wings started to respond to the left control yoke input. However, at about this time he observed trees and houses in front of him. The pilot reported that he then attempted to slow the airplane down by reducing power and pulling back on the control yoke in an effort to minimize impact with terrain. He added that he thought the airplane impacted terrain in a right-wing-low attitude, but at this point everything was a blur until the airplane came to a stop, at which time he remembered his legs were pinned under the instrument panel. The pilot stated that prior to and during the flight leading up to the accident, there were not anomalies with the airplane or engine. The HAF weather reporting facility at the time of the accident was wind 190 degrees at 10 knots, gusts to 14 knots, sky clear, temperature 17C, dew point 3C, and an altimeter reading of 30.03 inches of mercury.The wreckage was recovered to a secure storage area for further examination.

Melissa Claire Magee

Stephen Magee, husband and pilot of the Cessna 172, suffered serious injuries when the plane crashed into a home in the Moss Beach area on November 18, 2016. Stephen Magee is an original member of the Sac Aero Flying Club and which owned the Cessna 172N Skyhawk.

http://registry.faa.gov/N6610DLocation: Moss Beach, CAAccident Number: WPR17FA023Date & Time: 11/18/2016, 1117 PSTRegistration: N6610DAircraft: CESSNA 172NAircraft Damage: SubstantialDefining Event: Turbulence encounterInjuries: 1 Fatal, 1 SeriousFlight Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Personal On November 18, 2016, about 1117 Pacific standard time, a Cessna 172N, N6610D, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain while on final approach to Half Moon Bay Airport (HAF), Half Moon Bay, California. The private pilot sustained serious injuries, and the passenger was fatally injured. The personal flight was operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed in the area, and no flight plan was filed for the flight, which originated from Sacramento Executive Airport (SAC), Sacramento, California, about 1015, and was destined for HAF.The pilot reported that, before departing SAC, he checked the weather for HAF, which indicated winds were from the southwest. He subsequently departed and requested visual flight rules flight following to HAF. The pilot stated that while approaching HAF, he made position reports on the airport's common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) and requested traffic information. Someone responded that the wind was from the southeast up to 15 knots (kts) and that runway 12 was in use.The pilot stated that he entered the airport traffic pattern for runway 12, and that as the airplane entered the final leg of the traffic pattern, the visual approach slope indicator (VASI) lights indicated that the airplane was high. At that time, the airplane was at an altitude about 800 ft mean sea level (msl) and at an airspeed of 65 kts when he reduced power to intercept the VASI glideslope.As the airplane continued on the final approach path with full flaps (30°) at 60 kts and about 500 ft msl, it began to encounter light turbulence. The pilot was concerned that if the turbulence continued during the approach, he would be vulnerable to strong buffeting at normal approach speed, which might lead to a rough landing; as a countermeasure, he elected to land at a higher airspeed. The pilot then retracted the flaps to less than 20° while applying additional power to stay on the glideslope. The pilot added that, immediately after making these adjustments, he felt strong turbulence violently rock the airplane, which caused the wings to "dip," first to the left, and then to the right. He "simultaneously" felt a strong downdraft, and the airplane entered a steep right bank. The pilot stated that he fought to level the wings and gain altitude by applying full power, slight back pressure on the yoke, and then left aileron and rudder, but nothing seemed to correct the descent and right bank attitude. The pilot stated that he observed runway 12 come into view about 90° to his right but could not reach the runway due to the airplane's low altitude. Shortly thereafter, the pilot noticed large trees coming into view. Wanting to avoid trees in his flight path, the pilot stated that he maneuvered and tried to drag the airplane's tail on the ground. He next recalled closing his eyes to protect them, followed by impact. Pilot InformationCertificate: PrivateAge: 64, MaleAirplane Rating(s): Single-engine LandSeat Occupied: LeftOther Aircraft Rating(s): NoneRestraint Used: 3-pointInstrument Rating(s): AirplaneSecond Pilot Present: NoInstructor Rating(s): NoneToxicology Performed: NoMedical Certification: Class 3 With Waivers/LimitationsLast FAA Medical Exam: 04/15/2015Occupational Pilot: NoLast Flight Review or Equivalent: 07/21/2015Flight Time: 1145 hours (Total, all aircraft), 884 hours (Total, this make and model), 1011 hours (Pilot In Command, all aircraft), 17 hours (Last 90 days, all aircraft), 10 hours (Last 30 days, all aircraft), 1 hours (Last 24 hours, all aircraft) The pilot held a private pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single-engine land and instrument airplane. He reported 1,145 total hours of flight experience, with 884 hours in the accident airplane make and model. Further, the pilot reported that he had flown 16.7 hours, 10.4 hours, and 1 hour in the preceding 90 days, 30 days, and 24 hours respectively. His most recent flight review was conducted on July 21, 2015, in the same make and model as the accident airplane.The pilot was issued a third-class Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) medical certificate on April 15, 2015, with the limitation that he must have available glasses for near vision. Aircraft and Owner/Operator InformationAircraft Manufacturer: CESSNARegistration: N6610DModel/Series: 172N NAircraft Category: AirplaneYear of Manufacture: 1979Amateur Built: NoAirworthiness Certificate: NormalSerial Number: 17272897Landing Gear Type: TricycleSeats: 4Date/Type of Last Inspection: 04/05/2016, AnnualCertified Max Gross Wt.: 2299 lbsTime Since Last Inspection: 173 HoursEngines: 1 ReciprocatingAirframe Total Time: 5768 Hours at time of accidentEngine Manufacturer: LYCOMINGELT: C126 installed, not activatedEngine Model/Series: O-360 SERIESRegistered Owner: SAC AERO FLYING CLUB INCRated Power: 180 hpOperator: On fileOperating Certificate(s) Held: None The airplane was a single-engine, high wing, fixed landing gear, four-seat Cessna 172N, manufactured in 1979. It was powered by a normally aspirated, 180-horsepower Lycoming O-360-A4M engine, serial number RL-12115-36E, that drove a Sensenich, metal, 2-bladed, fixed-pitch propeller. A review of maintenance records revealed that the last annual inspection was accomplished on April 5, 2016, at an engine total time of 1,068.9 hours, and an airframe total time of 5,768 hours. The airplane and engine had accumulated a total of 173.2 hours since its most recent inspection. Meteorological Information and Flight PlanConditions at Accident Site: Visual ConditionsCondition of Light: DayObservation Facility, Elevation: HAF, 66 ft mslObservation Time: 1115 PSTDistance from Accident Site: 1 Nautical MilesDirection from Accident Site: 155°Lowest Cloud Condition: ClearTemperature/Dew Point: 17°C / 3°CLowest Ceiling: NoneVisibility: 10 MilesWind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 10 knots/ 14 knots, 190°Visibility (RVR): Altimeter Setting: 30.03 inches HgVisibility (RVV):Precipitation and Obscuration: No Obscuration; No PrecipitationDeparture Point: Sacramento, CA (SAC)Type of Flight Plan Filed: NoneDestination: Half Moon Bay, CA (HAF)Type of Clearance: NoneDeparture Time: 1015 PSTType of Airspace: Class G At 1115, the HAF weather reporting facility, located about ½ nm southeast of the accident site, reported wind from 190° at 10 kts, with gusts to 14 kts, visibility 10 statute miles, sky clear, temperature 17° C, dew point 3° C, and an altimeter setting of 30.03 inches of mercury.A weather study revealed that a weak temperature inversion between 400 and 600 ft msl was present near the accident site at the time of the accident. Between 1100 and 1200 PST, the vertical environment changed from an unstable layer to a stable layer. The study found that the stable layer trapped any updrafts or downdrafts created by the wind flowing over the rise in terrain to the west and southwest of the airport. These changes created an environment favorable for low level wind shear and turbulence below 600 ft msl.FAA Advisory Circular 00-6B (AC-00-06B), section 17.2.3.1, describes how areas near temperature inversions are favored for wind shear conditions. The AC notes that "Strong wind shears often occur across temperature inversion layers, which can generate turbulence." Airport InformationAirport: Half Moon Bay (HAF)Runway Surface Type: Asphalt; ConcreteAirport Elevation: 66 ftRunway Surface Condition: DryRunway Used: 12IFR Approach: NoneRunway Length/Width: 5000 ft / 150 ftVFR Approach/Landing: Precautionary Landing; Traffic Pattern Wreckage and Impact InformationCrew Injuries: 1 SeriousAircraft Damage: SubstantialPassenger Injuries: 1 FatalAircraft Fire: NoneGround Injuries: N/AAircraft Explosion: NoneTotal Injuries: 1 Fatal, 1 SeriousLatitude, Longitude: 37.520000, -122.511389 The airplane descended into a residential area about 1,822 ft northwest of the HAF runway 12 threshold. The initial point of impact was identified by two parallel rubber tire marks on a street about 245 ft southwest of the main wreckage. The airplane continued in a northeast direction across an open field that was about 100 ft wide, and subsequently struck a wooden fence that separated the field from a home. The airplane then continued on a northeast heading as it impacted the southeast corner of the roof of the home, which was followed by impact with a utility truck. The airplane's right wing tip and a landing gear strut were found in the front yard of the home.The wreckage path then continued about 60 ft in a northeasterly direction. The nose landing gear was located about 30 ft northeast of the utility truck, and the main wreckage came to rest on the southwest corner of a second home. The lower fuselage came to rest flush against the brick structure of the residence with the engine firewall resting upright on the ground. The empennage separated just behind the rear passenger seats and was folded over and on top of the cabin, with the vertical stabilizer and rudder resting on the ground. The horizontal stabilizer and elevator remained attached to the fuselage. The cabin and cockpit areas were both destroyed by impact forces.The left wing remained attached to the fuselage; the wing strut remained attached. The left flap and the inboard half of the aileron remained attached to the left wing.The right wing, which had separated from the fuselage, impacted a white cargo van that was parked in an adjacent driveway about 7 ft from the main wreckage site.About 4 ft of the outboard right aileron was separated from the wing and located next to the fuselage. The inboard section of the right aileron remained attached to the wing. Additionally, the right flap remained attached to the wing and appeared to be in the fully retracted position. The leading edge of the wing sustained impact damage. About 5 ft of the leading edge skin was separated at the wing's mid-span section. The outboard leading edge exhibited a concave depression.The engine, propeller, and one of the landing gear struts were located under the right wing. The left and right main landing gear wheels were separated from the wreckage and found about 42 ft north of the fuselage, next to the backyard fence of the second residence. Additional InformationPerformance StudyAn airplane performance study based on radar data revealed that the airplane approached HAF from the north and entered at 45° to the upwind leg for runway 12. The airplane's speed was about 86 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) and its altitude about 1,000 ft mean sea level (msl) when the pilot completed the turn for a left downwind to runway 12.The airplane slowed to about 80 KIAS and descended to about 700 ft msl on the downwind leg. The airplane then entered a continuous, 180° left turn from the downwind to final legs of the traffic pattern. Radar data indicated that, at 1116:20, the airspeed was about 57 KIAS, the altitude was 500 ft msl (about 440 ft above ground level), and the airplane was at the apex of a 10°-bank left turn to final. At this point, the airplane's pitch angle changed from about 5° nose up to about -3° nose down, and the airplane accelerated as it descended until impact, which occurred about 1117:10.The airplane's Pilot Operating Handbook (POH) estimates that the airplane will stall between 31 kts calibrated airspeed (KCAS) and 40 KCAS, depending on the airplane's flap position and bank angle. Additionally, the POH recommends "a slightly higher approach speed under turbulent air conditions." This is to compensate for any sudden loss in the headwind component, which would result in a momentary loss of airspeed and could lead to an aerodynamic stall above the published stall speed. Although the POH does not define "slightly higher", the FAA Airplane Flying Handbook recommends adding one-half of the reported surface wind gust to the normal final approach airspeed when landing in turbulent conditions.The handbook states that the degree to which flaps should be extended during a crosswind approach and landing vary with the airplane's handling characteristics, as well as the wind velocity. Additionally, the handbook advises that retraction of wing flaps during an approach for landing "suddenly decreases lift and causes the airplane to sink rapidly."

NTSB Identification: WPR17FA02314 CFR Part 91: General AviationAccident occurred Friday, November 18, 2016 in Moss Beach, CAAircraft: CESSNA 172N, registration: N6610DInjuries: 1 Fatal, 1 Serious.This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.On November 18, 2016, about 1120 Pacific standard time, a Cessna 172N, N6610D, sustained substantial damage after impacting terrain and objects in a residential area near Moss Beach, California, following a loss of control while on final approach to Half Moon Bay Airport (HAF), Half Moon Bay, California. The private pilot sustained serious injuries, and the non-pilot rated passenger was fatally injured. The personal cross-country flight was being operated in accordance with 14 Code of Federal Regulation Part 91, and a flight plan was not filed. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which originated from the Sacramento Executive Airport (SAC), Sacramento, California, about 1015, with HAF as the destination.In a telephone conversation with the National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge five days after the accident, the pilot reported that when he was about one-half mile from the end of runway 12 at an altitude of about 500 feet, with flaps full and an airspeed of 60 knots, he encountered light turbulence. He then reduced the flap setting to between 15 to 20 degrees, and increased power. At about this time he encountered very strong turbulence, which caused the wings to rock back and forth, followed by a very sudden downward push, which then resulted in the airplane going into a hard right bank attitude. The pilot stated that he tried to counter the right turn with an increase in power and left control yoke input, but the airplane continued in an uncommanded sweeping right turn. The pilot further stated that the airplane remained in the right turn very low to the ground, would not respond to the left control yoke input to counter the right turn, and would not gain altitude with the throttle pushed fully in. The pilot opined that as he was getting lower and closer to the ground, the airplanes' wings started to respond to the left control yoke input. However, at about this time he observed trees and houses in front of him. The pilot reported that he then attempted to slow the airplane down by reducing power and pulling back on the control yoke in an effort to minimize impact with terrain. He added that he thought the airplane impacted terrain in a right-wing-low attitude, but at this point everything was a blur until the airplane came to a stop, at which time he remembered his legs were pinned under the instrument panel. The pilot stated that prior to and during the flight leading up to the accident, there were not anomalies with the airplane or engine. The HAF weather reporting facility at the time of the accident was wind 190 degrees at 10 knots, gusts to 14 knots, sky clear, temperature 17C, dew point 3C, and an altimeter reading of 30.03 inches of mercury.The wreckage was recovered to a secure storage area for further examination.

The San Mateo County Coroner's office has identified 57-year-old Melissa Magee as the deceased person in a small plane crash that hit Moss Beach Friday morning. The incident occurred around 11:20 a.m. A Cessna 172N Skyhawk belonging to the Sac Aero Flying Club in Sacramento crashed into a home near Park Way, just north of the Half Moon Bay Airport. Magee was onboard the plane with one other person who has not been identified. On Friday, the San Mateo County Coroner's office confirmed that the woman had died at the scene. The other occupant was reportedly flown by helicopter to Stanford Hospital with injuries. On Saturday, the Coroner's Office said it could not confirm the condition of the other occupant nor identify who was flying the plane. The plane’s tail number indicated it was owned by the Sac Aero Flying Club. The plane had departed from the Sacramento Executive Airport and was headed to the Half Moon Bay Airport, confirmed FAA Public Affairs Manager Ian Gregor.Fire crews, California Highway Patrol, San Mateo County Sheriff’s deputies, PG&E employees, and Federal Air and Aviation officials responded to the scene.One house in the neighborhood appeared to have been hit by the plane, although most of the structure appeared undamaged. The owners were not home at the time, sheriff’s deputies said, though they had been notified of the crash. A truck parked next to the home also appeared to have been damaged.One eyewitness reported noticing that the plane was in distress before it crashed.“The plane was tilted sideways,” said Marie Cabural a Half Moon Bay resident who was driving in the neighborhood with a friend when she noticed the plane overhead before it crashed into the house. “We thought, that’s going to crash.” The plane is owned by a group of owners who use a hangar at the south end of the Sacramento Executive Airport, said Nik Stroiney, owner of Sacramento Aviation Inc., one of the flight schools and aircraft rental companies at the airport where the plane departed from. Stroiney said Sac Aero Flying Club is an informal club and not affiliated with any of the flight schools at the airport. He said he did not personally know any of the plane's owners. Privately owned planes and charters make up most of the airport’s traffic, said an airport spokesperson.Source: http://www.hmbreview.com

MOSS BEACH (CBS SF) — One person is dead after a small plane crashed into a home in Moss Beach not far from the Half Moon Bay Airport Friday morning, authorities said.San Mateo County Fire received a call at 11:18 a.m. of a small plane crashing north of the Half Moon Bay Airport.According to fire officials, the plane ended up at 1065 Park Way near Orval Avenue, at edge of a residential neighborhood near the airport. Initially one person was reported injured, but authorities later confirmed that one person was dead.Fire crews responded to the scene with heavy rescue equipment. The San Mateo County Sheriff’s office also responded.A man, apparently the pilot, was pulled from the wreckage alive. Minutes later he was airlifted to a trauma center.His passenger — reported to be his wife — was killed.No one on the ground was hurt.The Cessna 172N Skyhawk airplane had flown out of Sacramento Executive Airport Friday morning, according to authorities.Video from Chopper 5 showed the wreckage of the plane at one end of a home. There appeared to be some damage where the plane hit the structure, but most of the home seemed to be intact.Patti Gallinetti lives one block away and saw the dramatic rescue unfold.“It was just one crash, like metal. Just BOOM!” explained Gallinetti. “It’s an experience that I hope we don’t have too often.”Damage on the ground showed the plane first clipped the corner of one house, then smashed into a parked pickup truck before tumbling across the street into the garage portion of the other house.One experienced Half Moon Bay pilot told KPIX 5 the position of the plane indicated that it was probably on final approach when it went down.“It could have been anything. Fuel exhaustion, pilot error, pilot incapacitation. It’s extremely rare,” said pilot George Golda. “I’ve been living here for 35 years. This is the only crash I’ve ever seen.” NTSB and FAA investigators will take over the scene to try and find out exactly what caused the crash.Story and video: http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com

MOSS BEACH (KTVU & BCN) -- One person was killed and a second person was hurt when a small plane that departed from Sacramento and was en route to the Bay Area crashed into a home Friday morning near the Half Moon Bay Airport in Moss Beach, authorities saidThe crash of the Cessna 172N Skyhawk with two people on board was reported at 11:18 a.m. in the 1000 block of Park Avenue, fire and Federal Aviation Administration officials said. The identities of the victims were pending.

One victim died at the scene. The pilot was airlifted to a local hospital for treatment of serious injuries. It was not clear if anyone on the ground was injured during the incident. We're told the family was not home at the time of the crash.

"We saw it landing and doing some circling," said witness Ismal Sanchez.

When it came down, it appears it clipped the roof of one home, damaged a utility truck and then crashed into another home's garage."I heard a noise which I know now is a plane wreck...it was really strange. It was like crunching metal, it sounded like a car wreck except it was longer than a car wreck would be," said neighbor Alan Brennan.Ismal Sanchez says he was working in the neighborhood and ran to help when he heard the crash.

He says they feared the plane would explode so he had to act fast."I shut the electricity from the house because there was a car and gas spilling on the ground so it was kind of risky but when you want to save someone you don't think about that," said Sanchez.Meanwhile, he says others tried to help the pilot who was trapped in the plane. I heard the pilot say 'my wife my wife'," said Sanchez."The firefighters were taking him out of the front driveway of the house in between the wreckage of the plane," said neighbor Jake Ward.Emergency responders worked to secure the area for federal investigators, sheriff's spokesman Detective Salvador Zuno said.A spokesman for the FAA said the plane had departed from Sacramento Executive Airport and was heading to Half Moon Bay Airport when the accident occurred.Story and video: http://www.ktvu.com

As previously reported on WGEL, an airplane made a wheels-up landing Wednesday evening at the Greenville Airport, meaning the plane’s landing gear was not functional. Randy Vasel of Greenville was the pilot of the plane.Vasel told WGEL that he was flying with Mark Owensby Wednesday. They left just before 4 PM and when it was time to land, the gear malfunctioned. Vasel said they tried to deploy the landing gear manually, but that didn’t work either. Vasel contacted the airport to tell them about the situation and Greenville Fire Protection District personnel, ambulance personnel, and emergency helicopters were called to the scene.Fortunately, Vasel was able to land the plane without incident.Vasel said he got a little excited when the emergency situation arose, but he remembered his training. He said he was able to remain calm through the ordeal.Vasel, who has been flying planes since he was 15, told us the close call Wednesday night would not deter him from flying planes and he’s looking forward to getting back in an airplane as soon as possible.Story and audio: http://www.wgel.com